Social integration and human development in Sri Lanka

Human security emphasizes that people must be protected when facing sudden and profound reversals in economic and social life. In addition to “growth with equity,” human security is equally concerned with “down-turns with security.” In the absence of safety nets, people face critical and pervasive in-securities in situations of sudden downturns.

The Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development, Commitment 4 – 1995 defines social integration as “the process fostering societies that are stable, safe and just and that are based on the promotion and protection of all human rights, as well as the non-discrimination, tolerance, respect for diversity, equality of opportunity, solidarity, security and participation of all people, including disadvantaged and vulnerable groups and person.” The four basic standards drawn are: Respecting all human rights and fundamental freedom, Nurturing of unity in cultural, religious and ethnic diversity, Realizing social justice by enshrining the rights of vulnerable and marginalized groups and Ensuring democratic participation and the rule of law.

Amartya Sen (2000) convincingly argued that poverty is not merely insufficient income, but rather the absence of wide range of capabilities, including security and ability to participate in economic and political systems. http://www.ukessays.com/essays/economics/the-financial-inclusion-for-inc…. It is, thus, critical that all discussions of development must necessarily contend with the vexed questions of both equality before law and justice if we want to avoid the abuse of power and lawlessness that have become a part of the lot of the poor. For too often the discussions about access to, and equality before law have focused on supply-side constraints — the insufficiency of courts, judges and lawyers — as also procedural innovations to make the legal system cheaper, faster, more transparent and fair. Unfortunately, we have spent insufficient energy on understanding and deconstructing the relationships between law, justice and fairness, concepts that are deeply influenced by history, ideology and culture. Moreover, as Upendra Baxi so convincingly points out, improving access to law should not be conflated with access to justice.

Proportional equality

Known as the Jacksonian concept of equality, it postulates that it is not sufficient that law treats each person alike but the law should afford to each individual all those opportunities of basic nature which are important preconditions to the realisation of the full value of available liberties. People are equally entitled to all that facilitates, their development as rational persons. This concept of equality ensures, for each individual, the existence of a broad class of external circumstances that facilitate full development and expression of the capacities involved in rational life, and which afford unrestricted access to available goods.

Thus, while formal equality guarantees equality of opportunity and leans in favour of liberty, proportional equality tries to gain equality of achievement which results in some infringement of liberty in order to secure a maximum of equality of condition, without which it is argued that opportunities cannot be equal. While formal equality has a negative or no role for the state, proportional equality necessitates a positive role for the government so that equality of conditions or results is produced.

Although the concept of proportional equality tilts in favour of equality, it does not favour to eliminate liberty. The concept of proportional equality is advocated by liberal democratic governments and writers who favour a welfare state, contending that statutory equality is meaningless unless a level playing field is provided.

John Rawls’ theory of justice, which tries to harmonize the principle of liberty and equality consists of two principles: (1) Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all; (2) Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both: (a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just savings principles, and (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity. (Rawls, 1972). Thus, Rawls tries to harmonise the three criteria, rights, deserts, and needs to provide justice to all.

Marc Galanter has argued in the Indian context that ‘Compensatory Discrimination may be advocated not as a device to ensure fairness to individuals, but as a means to produce desired social customs, e.g. to reduce group disparities, afford representation, encourage development of social talent and so forth. To distribute benefits by neutral standards, will perpetuate and amplify unjust exactions and exclusions of the past. Fairness then, demands that present distribution be arranged to undo and offset old biases, not to perpetuate them’. (Galanter, 1984).

Thus, compensatory programmes differ from redistribution programmes mainly with regard to their concern with the past. Redistribution is concerned with eliminating the present inequalities, while compensatory justice is concerned not only with this but with also providing compensation for unfair burdens borne in the past. Therefore, considerations of compensatory justice can justify a person getting more in the present than he would unless we consider his past losses.

Sri Lanka consists of varying types of communities, religions, cultural and traditional systems; and survivors of conflict, disaster, and the longer disparities generated from persistent poverty and vulnerability. There are calls for more concerted and broader efforts to reach those whom are vulnerable and may not be able to express themselves because of this vulnerability.

Sri Lanka has recognized that achieving social cohesion is contingent on:

* Fostering an informed and integrated society founded on the pillars of ethics, education and empowerment

*Strengthening the 7 elements of the social integration process which are; Access to Education, Access to Economic Activities and Employment, Access to Justice and Legal Resources, Access to a Safe and Secure Social Environment, Access to a Safe and Secure Physical Environment, Access to Political Participation and Belonging and Responsibility.

*Ensuring individual wellbeing and quality of life, facilitating upward mobility for all, and empowering youth and women as change agents

*Assuring consistency in building and promoting trust to nurture a strong sense of belonging within the nation

The National Policy Framework for Social Integration (NPFSI) has in the final report published in November 2011 amongst its objectives: Define stakeholders and partners, roles and responsibilities, strategies, coordination and cooperation, interventions and recommendations, Guarantee social inclusion by strengthening the elements of the social integration process AND Ensure individual wellbeing and quality of life, facilitate upward mobility for all. It adopts a rights Based approach including upholding the rights and responsibilities of duty bearers and rights holders AND an inclusive and participatory process with collective commitment to implementation.

The 05 districts in Northern Province are in the first 05 places in the performance of school candidates by district, and a district in the Eastern Province is placed 6th in the list

Promoting ethnic harmony through education:

– Ethnically Mixed Student Populations in Public Universities.

– Trilingual Degree Courses in all universities.

– Subject of National Harmony as a credit course in all degrees in universities.

– Recommendations for which Cabinet approval was sought are:

– Make proficiency in Tamil a prerequisite to qualify for a degree by Sinhala students and vice versa with the new enrollments.

– Make acquiring proficiency in Tamil a prerequisite for confirmation in the post for Sinhala employees and vice versa.

– Grant credit to students with proficiency in Sinhala /Tamil when it is not their mother tongue when admitting student to universities under the special intake.

Sri Lanka could well consider many concepts ‘Compensatory Discrimination’ described earlier in fashioning polices which provide for social inclusion and human development. In closing its worth noting a passage from the REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC STRATEGIES COMMITTEE for Singapore, February 2010 titled, HIGH-SKILLED PEOPLE, INNOVATIVE ECONOMY, DISTINCTIVE GLOBAL CITY which states -“We must make skills, innovation and productivity the basis for sustaining Singapore’s economic growth. This will also provide for inclusive growth, with a broad-based increase in the incomes of our citizens. We must also be a vibrant and distinctive global city – open and diverse, the best place to grow and reach out to a rising Asia, and a home that provides an outstanding quality of life for our people”. Sri Lanka could perhaps walk in a similar direction.